Legal loophole allows wealthy fathers to pay nothing for their children.
I know from lurking on forums that there are very many women as frustrated, disappointed and angry as I am with the child maintenance situation and I am keeping everything crossed that the MumsNet army will sign my petition and force the government to take a closer look....
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/177046
The Child Maintenance Service no longer looks at assets or wealth outside of salary therefore individuals paid via dividends or from international income streams are outside of its jurisdiction, leaving millionaires legally entitled to absolve themselves of financial contributions towards their children.
For frustrated mothers the fact that such transparent 'income modification' is legally sanctioned is as distressing as the pressure left on them to cope financially.
Lawyers are well aware of the need for change, so why hasn't it happened? Because case law sets precedents and the financial disparity that can arise between separated parents at home is exposed in the courtroom where the wealthy parent with the better lawyer keeps on 'winning'.
Mothers questing for justice are at the mercy of UK law and things have gone from bad to worse since a case led to Judges not applying Schedule 1 of the Children's Act until a tribunal hearing via the CMS has been reached and won; seemingly impossible to do when the CMS don't look at wealth outside of salary. In any case evidencing wealth to get to tribunal stage (either on or off salary) requires documents and financial data that would breach the wealthy parent's privacy.
Essentially mothers battling the system for child support from wealthy fathers who fund their lifestyles outside of salary are being told that their battle is with the moral fibre of their ex and not their exes finances.
The CMS and Schedule 1 of the Children's Act were intended to protect children yet wealth disparity and neglectful intent has left both wide open to corruption meaning these laws and institutions now serve the wealthy to allow legal abandonment of children.
With co-habitation on the rise the assumption is the law will change to reflect the un-married mother's need for financial protection. However, given that the women who most urgently need the law to change are likely to be juggling work, childcare and lengthy frustrating calls to the CMS they are unlikely to have the time or money to make it happen.
Leading London Law Firm Vardags note that;
‘The CMS is a blunt instrument, at best difficult to navigate, at worst, impenetrable. Five different pieces of dense legislation and regulations set out the pathway to child maintenance, administrated by a computerised system, which does not adapt to nuanced personal circumstances.
In this global age where “super earners” are increasingly ingenious in the ways in which they manage their finances and hold their assets, the CMS offers a woefully unsophisticated system that continues to fail the most vulnerable, leaving a significant band of children penalised due to the disparity of wealth between their parents. These are not parents who are impoverished, quite the opposite. These are parents who are able to arrange their wealth to fall outside of the unyielding CMS criteria, circumventing their responsibilities to their children. Some non-resident parents are manipulating the system by setting up business structures and income streams to defeat the stringent rules, because they are armed with the best legal advice money can buy and use the system’s inherent rigidity to their advantage. I believe that such action is morally reprehensible and needs to be met with a strong and easily accessible system that seeks to protect the child rather than the current series of loopholes available to the financially dominant party.
The decision to end the CMS’s ability to look behind the UK tax returns and to consider the global lifestyle of the paying parent has shut down the only avenue of attack which can be easily demonstrated and views a parent’s financial circumstances more broadly. Unless the paying parent earns an income in excess of £156,000, which leads to a maximum assessment by the CMS, the courts have no jurisdiction to intervene and take account of the wider picture of wealth. This is an area of law crying out for change; the system is being manipulated and, in many cases, is failing to protect those children it was set up to help.’ vardags.com/
I have experienced first hand the shortfall in the law with regards maintenance for my older children and it has also impacted my husband who is legally obliged to pick up the financial slack for his step-children. I am delighted that Vardags are supporting my campaign and petition for change. I hope that this platform gives women like me a chance to be heard in a system that currently makes us feel silent and weak; crucially I hope that it gives us and our children hope for a fairer financial future.
Please sign and share away!
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/177046
Please or to access all these features
Please
or
to access all these features
Petitions and activism
Legal loophole allows wealthy fathers to pay nothing for their children.
19 replies
user1484648446 · 17/01/2017 10:33
OP posts:
PostTruthEra ·
17/01/2017 11:35
It also allows wealthy mothers to not pay as well. I think you need to change the wording to 'parents'. 
Please create an account
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.